133 points

Save you a click:

In a 6-3 ruling authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, the court found that a president has absolute immunity for acts within their core constitutional powers and a presumption of immunity for “acts within the outer perimeter of his official responsibility.”

Judge Chutkan will now be responsible for applying the Supreme Court’s decision to the allegations in Trump’s criminal case, including whether Trump’s actions were “official acts” or private conduct that can be prosecuted.

permalink
report
reply
128 points

I’m sure they won’t intervene again after handing down an extremely confused and indecipherable opinion on what does and doesn’t qualify for presidential immunity.

permalink
report
parent
reply
68 points

well, the president has no role, official or otherwise, in the election process or certification of election results. his only role was to vacate 1600 penn ave and leave the government and peoples’ property behind.

so i fully expect scRotus to intervene again, once the district judge in dc rules along those lines.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Should be scRotuM. Because they are less of the United States than they are of the Millionaires.

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points
*

My understanding is that if a prosecutor even wants to bring charges against someone who was president when the alleged offense(s) were committed, the prosecutor has to first demonstrate that the offending acts were not “official acts.”

Nobody really knows what that looks like, of course, but it definitely opens the door for Judge Chutkan to call for hearings on whether the acts alleged to be criminal were “official” or not. Which would probably look exactly like a trial - presentation of evidence, witnesses, cross examination, defense - just where the only judgment at the end would be “Nope, not official acts.”

Then that gets appealed, all the way to SCOTUS, then maybe an actual trial happens. Then they complain that there’s no way to get an impartial jury, because everyone already knows all the details of the case, that gets appealed …

Delay is the point, and SCOTUS is complicit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Delaying is the point but I think things actually get really interesting as soon as the judge calls for hearings and witnesses show up. If the act is official, and therefore Trump would have immunity, there is no fifth amendment protection for him to avoid answering questions, or to lie about anything. So that means he needs to give a lot of information, some of which might point at people who don’t have absolute immunity, and could possibly be locked up for their actions.

So then we have this interesting situation where Trump will be called to testify, and if he does so inaccurately, he could be held in criminal contempt. Remember, he has to stand by the claim that his acts are official, so he can’t play fast and loose on the stand and maintain his absolute immunity defense.

Of course we don’t know. We have no idea how any of this will play out. But we can imagine how it might play out from absolute immunity defenses with judges and prosecutors. No doubt that’s what the judge will rely on as guidelines for this case.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points
*

“Outer perimeter of official responsibility”?

WTF is that? How is that enforceable?

You know what is much easier to enforce?

“No. One. Is. Above. The. Law.”

As the Founding Fathers obviously intended.

It’s like the universe is trying to make it obvious that this is a stupid and nonsensical path but our “supreme” judges keep setting us up for absolute failure as a nation.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

We actually had to pass section 1983 of the federal code in 1871 for that exact reason. The founders may have intended it, but they didn’t write it down specifically. Then in 1874 an unnamed secretary illegally revised the law while “copying” it from the Congressional Record to the Federal Register. This led to the Qualified Immunity argument that was the crux of Harlow v Fitzgerald.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/15/us/politics/qualified-immunity-supreme-court.html

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

“Outer perimeter of official responsibility”? WTF is that? How is that enforceable?

Remember when there was that standoff between Texas and the Feds along the border? There was a lot of bloviating about how it was an invasion force, and that Biden was somehow using it to orchestrate an overthrow of the US Government. Of course, the truth was nothing of the sort. Biden, as President, and the Homeland Security department under him, has a lot of leeway in terms of how they execute laws, but Congress still makes the laws, and Republicans in Congress have deliberately let the situation at the border fester to score political points.

However, if this Supreme Court ruling had gone fully the other way, and the President was ruled to have no particular immunity whatsoever, it would only be a matter of time before some local prosecutor in Texas would decide to prosecute Biden for insurrection, as retribution for Trump’s current situation. Even though there are no facts that actually back up a case against Biden, while we all saw what happened on Jan 6th.

So, the idea that Presidents can’t be prosecuted for simply doing their jobs has some merit. But the Supreme Court went way too far constructing way too high a burden for prosecutors who need to investigate crimes committed by the President outside that perimeter. Under this guidance, the President could direct the Secretary of State to include a discussion of building a golf course in treaty negotiations, and even if that is found out, prosecutors can’t call the Secretary to testify or use that evidence in court in a bribery investigation

permalink
report
parent
reply
39 points

I hate everyone

permalink
report
reply
9 points

Kamala should spend term one fighting this and getting it sorted. Term 2 should be okay im going to maximize the use of this(but like NOT in the evil way, just USE it in a way it shouldnt be available to used) like send people to gitmo or something… openly.

I dont really know how what to do with it, but if they wont come to reason, stop being reasonable. She seems smart and capable enough to do it.

I wouldnt trust Hilary as president with this, but Kamala seems like a person who could use this to show just how bad this can be abused, but do good with it

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

By her term two he’ll probably be dead (of natural causes.)

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Of hamberders

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

I hate everyone

Yup. I think I’ll generally agree with this sentiment, every day until the end of my existence. Humanity is very disappointing. Observing news, elections and social media has poisoned my soul. [1](https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/fuck-this-gay-earth)


  1. ftge ↩︎

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Me too, friend. It could all be so simple if we approached every decision with love and care. :’(

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Me too, kid. Me too.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

It sounds to me like she has to decide if it applies or not. Not that she is forced to rule immunity. So basically more delay.

permalink
report
reply
5 points

Why is this the future I’m stuck in God dammit this shit is so stupid. Fucking corruption and greed.

permalink
report
reply
2 points

Born too soon to serve and die in a world war

Born too late to serve and die in a world war

Born just in time to see the collapse of liberal democracy and human rights

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 6.4K

    Posts

  • 110K

    Comments